[citation][nom]JOSHSKORN[/nom]I'm starting to believe the end of the Desktop PC is near. I wonder which will adopt Ultra HD first, the PC or the mobile phone. Games are bound to one day be in Ultra HD. Give it 3 years for games. Until then, there won't be a point. Ultra HD Monitors/TVs won't be affordable until then.[/citation]
ok, tell me the pc that doesnt have at least dual gpu sli that can handle 3,840 × 2,160
look, right now for even 2560x1600 you need at least 2 gpus, with current gen hardware.
but at 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 you only need 1 mid range to max a game almost, and 1 high end to max almost every game at around 45fps.
cellphones may get higher resolutions, but are the games and crap really running at those resolutions, and are they even close to what a mid range pc can put out?
look, right now for even 2560x1600 you need at least 2 gpus, with current gen hardware. ook, right now for even 2560x1600 you need at least 2 gpus, with current gen hardware.
but at 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 you only need 1 mid range to max a game almost, and 1 high end to max almost every game at around 45fps. ut at 1920x1080 or 1920x1200 you only need 1 mid range to max a game almost, and 1 high end to max almost every game at around 45fps.
cellphones may get higher resolutions, but are the games and crap really running at those resolutions, and are they even close to what a mid range pc can put out?ellphones may get higher resolutions, but are the games and crap really running at those resolutions, and are they even close to what a mid range pc can put out?
[citation][nom]bobsmithsmith1[/nom]Gaming in early 1990's: "high-end PC" + 17" screen (CRT);Gaming in mid 1990's: "high-end PC" + 19" screen (CRT);Gaming in late 1990's: "high-end PC" + 21" screen (LCD);Gaming in early 2000's: high-end PC + 22" screen (LCD);Gaming in mid 2000's: high-end PC + 24" screen (LED);Gaming in late 2000's: high-end PC + 27" screen (LED);Expected gaming experience on 2013: high-end PC + 42" OLED LCD screen (or multi-monitor)Real-life Gaming in 2013: horrible joystick + 5" LCD screen?Definitely something went wrong.Never believed in NVidia. Never will.[/citation]
i use a controller for many games, most of them are platformers or racing as i don't want to buy a wheel, but controller none the less. you really dont see what they are trying to do if you are boiling it down to just that...
also, the pc future is headmount display from what we have seen over the last year or so and how many people are jumping to it, sony, valve, id with id being the first to offer a head mount.
as far as i can see, head mount will be the end all till true holo deck stuff comes around.
[citation][nom]pchisholm[/nom]So Nvidia are expecting me to buy their device after I've already forked out for a high-end gaming rig so I can play a game on a 5" screen .... give me a second to check my calendar .... have I been stuck in a time-warp and it's April 1st already?What they are doing is cool and it's definately exploiting some serious technological performance advances, but the suggested application is, frankly, ridiculous assuming the required network bandwidth is even available to the masses. You get the feeling that Nvidia just felt obliged to announce something aside from some new silicon, which they're almost obliged to do anyway (since they have share holders) but this is just crazy. Sometimes it's better to say nothing and let people think you're an idiot than to say something and remove all doubt.[/citation]
they made a hand held system, with rudimentary functionality to be a bridge from the pc to a tv, possibly even having the pc on the go. sure, i may not play a fps on it like that, but i would play a 3rd person shooter, i would play a racing game, and i would play a platformer.
oh wait, the logic you used, OH NO THEY BRANCHED OUT, THEY ARE KILLING THE PC.
seriously, i have read enough of that that its just annoying at this point.
[citation][nom]pchisholm[/nom]I gotta be honest, even if their gfx cards are good, I'm really having second thoughts about spending money on products from a company with such a warped view of reality. I just can't get my head around it.[/citation]
what, that they are trying new things? they they brought out a handheld for a market that doesnt cost 2000$ and use desktop hardware?
[citation][nom]EzioAs[/nom]I agree. However, there are too many people who are just too lazy to set graphics settings manually. Then they came to forums and said their cards can't play the newer games anymore and they need to buy a high end card even though they never bother to play with the settings a little bit . I kinda understand if it's kids or people who are fairly new to pc gaming, but for the rest and especially those who spend hundreds or thousands on their own custom gaming PC, nuh uh . The settings are there to accommodate different sets of hardware so that you'll be able to get playable framerates. Learn to use it people![/citation]
some people just want ultra without sacrificing anything, personally, all i want at ultra are texture settings, everything else im willing to compromise